"PS4 can render 1080p/60fps with room to spare” -Kojima

24

Comments

  • scoop1215
    scoop1215 Members Posts: 592 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2014
    the difference is ps4 is 1080p at 60 fps while xbone is 720p at 60 fps.
    but all versions look amazing its that fox engine
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Alkinduz wrote: »
    So judging from that vid, there ain't that much of a difference between the One and the 4...and the diff between current and Next gen is there but not really gamebreaking much

    This is a little too general. Remember you're still comparing "end of lifetime" PS3/360 games to "beginning of lifetime" PS4/XB1 games. So no the differences aren't gamebreaking now, but that's because they squeezing everything they can for the older generation systems while just scratching the surface of the new generation systems.

    A similar argument can be made between the PS4 and XB1. The PS4 seemingly has more potential, but that doesn't matter as much now because they aren't even close to tapping the real potential of either platform. Some developers say there isn't much of a difference between what you can do with the two systems, and some others suggest that they can do things with the PS4 that simply can't e done with the XB1. Only time will tell which is really true.
  • BlackxChild
    BlackxChild Members Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zoomzoomp5 wrote: »
    h15F2A506

    You know this game is a port right?
  • focus
    focus Members Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2014
    You know this game is a port right?

    LOL. Doesn't really matter. With the way some Sony fanboys act, you'd expect the PS4 to be completely dominating in graphics when compared to any game released on XO. The "power" of the PS4 should be undeniable at all times. From launch until end of life, nobody ever said or believed any Wii game was comparable to the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphics, for example. There was no question. You'll also notice the Wii U version of Assassins Creed 4 isn't included in that comparison.

    So while you ? busy putting a magnifying glass up to your TV trying to notice a slight pixel difference in a game that's only 2 hours long and, knowing Kojima, probably an hour and a half of cutscene, i'll be calling in my Titan.
  • BlackxChild
    BlackxChild Members Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭✭✭
    achewon87 wrote: »
    Alkinduz wrote: »
    So judging from that vid, there ain't that much of a difference between the One and the 4...and the diff between current and Next gen is there but not really gamebreaking much

    Pretty much; in the end it will always come down to the games and which controller you prefer...
    There probably isn't much of a difference between the 2 but you're comparing ports. The ps3 and ps4 versions barely look different. The point is y spend more money for the xbox one?
  • scoop1215
    scoop1215 Members Posts: 592 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2014
    focus wrote: »
    You know this game is a port right?

    LOL. Doesn't really matter. With the way some Sony fanboys act, you'd expect the PS4 to be completely dominating in graphics when compared to any game released on XO. The "power" of the PS4 should be undeniable at all times. From launch until end of life, nobody ever said or believed any Wii game was comparable to the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphics, for example. There was no question. You'll also notice the Wii U version of Assassins Creed 4 isn't included in that comparison.

    So while you ? busy putting a magnifying glass up to your TV trying to notice a slight pixel difference in a game that's only 2 hours long and, knowing Kojima, probably an hour and a half of cutscene, i'll be calling in my Titan.

    from what they say in the video I posted there are two main cutscenes the one we all saw the "intro" which is 10 minutes and then the outro cutscene. the audio logs u pick up thru the game tell the story of whats going on . the people who beat ground zero's and the side ops said it was 5 hours. and they were only at 20% complete.
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    focus wrote: »
    You know this game is a port right?

    LOL. Doesn't really matter. With the way some Sony fanboys act, you'd expect the PS4 to be completely dominating in graphics when compared to any game released on XO. The "power" of the PS4 should be undeniable at all times. From launch until end of life, nobody ever said or believed any Wii game was comparable to the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphics, for example. There was no question. You'll also notice the Wii U version of Assassins Creed 4 isn't included in that comparison.

    So while you ? busy putting a magnifying glass up to your TV trying to notice a slight pixel difference in a game that's only 2 hours long and, knowing Kojima, probably an hour and a half of cutscene, i'll be calling in my Titan.

    I remember how you claimed that you wouldn't be taking part in these discussions anymore after the XB1 dropped because you'd be too busy playing all the great games. Then the XB1 dropped and we got like a two day reprieve from your nonsense. It was a good two days though, so I'm looking forward to Titanfall and hoping it's everything you dream it to be.
  • focus
    focus Members Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2014
    focus wrote: »
    You know this game is a port right?

    LOL. Doesn't really matter. With the way some Sony fanboys act, you'd expect the PS4 to be completely dominating in graphics when compared to any game released on XO. The "power" of the PS4 should be undeniable at all times. From launch until end of life, nobody ever said or believed any Wii game was comparable to the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphics, for example. There was no question. You'll also notice the Wii U version of Assassins Creed 4 isn't included in that comparison.

    So while you ? busy putting a magnifying glass up to your TV trying to notice a slight pixel difference in a game that's only 2 hours long and, knowing Kojima, probably an hour and a half of cutscene, i'll be calling in my Titan.

    I remember how you claimed that you wouldn't be taking part in these discussions anymore after the XB1 dropped because you'd be too busy playing all the great games. Then the XB1 dropped and we got like a two day reprieve from your nonsense. It was a good two days though, so I'm looking forward to Titanfall and hoping it's everything you dream it to be.

    LOL. Really don't know what part of my comment you took personal offense with. Must have been my use of "Sony fanboy". Figures...
  • achewon87
    achewon87 Members Posts: 5,464 ✭✭✭✭✭
    achewon87 wrote: »
    Alkinduz wrote: »
    So judging from that vid, there ain't that much of a difference between the One and the 4...and the diff between current and Next gen is there but not really gamebreaking much

    Pretty much; in the end it will always come down to the games and which controller you prefer...
    There probably isn't much of a difference between the 2 but you're comparing ports. The ps3 and ps4 versions barely look different. The point is y spend more money for the xbox one?

    And graphically not much difference between Killzone and Ryse either, and they are not ports, build from ground up for each system...

    Anyways you're barking up the wrong tree as I actually own a PS4, can you say the same or you just whistling dixie?
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    focus wrote: »
    focus wrote: »
    You know this game is a port right?

    LOL. Doesn't really matter. With the way some Sony fanboys act, you'd expect the PS4 to be completely dominating in graphics when compared to any game released on XO. The "power" of the PS4 should be undeniable at all times. From launch until end of life, nobody ever said or believed any Wii game was comparable to the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphics, for example. There was no question. You'll also notice the Wii U version of Assassins Creed 4 isn't included in that comparison.

    So while you ? busy putting a magnifying glass up to your TV trying to notice a slight pixel difference in a game that's only 2 hours long and, knowing Kojima, probably an hour and a half of cutscene, i'll be calling in my Titan.

    I remember how you claimed that you wouldn't be taking part in these discussions anymore after the XB1 dropped because you'd be too busy playing all the great games. Then the XB1 dropped and we got like a two day reprieve from your nonsense. It was a good two days though, so I'm looking forward to Titanfall and hoping it's everything you dream it to be.

    LOL. Really don't know what part of my comment you took personal offense with. Must have been my use of "Sony fanboy". Figures...

    I didn't take offense to anything you said. Just noting how you're always talking about you'll be too busy playing games to take part in the debates on here, but yet here you are as always.

  • VulcanRaven
    VulcanRaven Members Posts: 18,859 ✭✭✭✭✭
    focus wrote: »
    You know this game is a port right?

    LOL. Doesn't really matter. With the way some Sony fanboys act, you'd expect the PS4 to be completely dominating in graphics when compared to any game released on XO. The "power" of the PS4 should be undeniable at all times. From launch until end of life, nobody ever said or believed any Wii game was comparable to the 360 or PS3 in terms of graphics, for example. There was no question. You'll also notice the Wii U version of Assassins Creed 4 isn't included in that comparison.

    So while you ? busy putting a magnifying glass up to your TV trying to notice a slight pixel difference in a game that's only 2 hours long and, knowing Kojima, probably an hour and a half of cutscene, i'll be calling in my Titan.

    I remember how you claimed that you wouldn't be taking part in these discussions anymore after the XB1 dropped because you'd be too busy playing all the great games. Then XB1 dropped and we got like a two day reprieve from your nonsense. It was a good two days though, so I'm looking forward to Titanfall and hoping it's everything you dream it to be.
    me and you both see this same lame BS, but then other people will ignore it and complain when something is said against the XboxOne. The truth is it is not a big deal with the resolutions, but both new consoles should be able to handle 1080p and 60fps when the devs want them too.If it was the other way around than he would slam the PS4 constantly.
  • KillaCham
    KillaCham Members, Moderators Posts: 11,417 Regulator
    Dunno how people are gonna ignore specs as if they aren't there. We already knew this ? , though. X1 games will still look good, they just won't always be 1080p or look as sharp as they do on the other console.
  • funkdocdamc
    funkdocdamc Members Posts: 3,786 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yall know these PS4 games are 1080p, but can't stay at 60fps. Kinda defeats the purpose of being 1080p if the game can't truly handle it without occasional slowdown/frame-dropping.
  • metal face terrorist
    metal face terrorist Members Posts: 1,708 ✭✭✭✭✭
    You ? sounding like some hoes. What Sony and M$ eat don't make you ? .
  • vageneral08
    vageneral08 Members Posts: 19,535 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lol this is hilarious an argument over frames per second and resolution lol
  • BlackxChild
    BlackxChild Members Posts: 2,916 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Yall know these PS4 games are 1080p, but can't stay at 60fps. Kinda defeats the purpose of being 1080p if the game can't truly handle it without occasional slowdown/frame-dropping.
    Xbox one has issues at 60 gps regardless... Also Microsoft is doing an update for the one that is actually going to effect textures over resolution which is stupid. I'd rather have better textures than better resolution.
  • Alkinduz
    Alkinduz Members Posts: 2,070 ✭✭✭✭✭
    So there is hope for the wii u then....? runs smooth 60f 1080p no probs and they ain't even really put the console to work....Zelda is going to be so sick

    wii u version of mgs should be ? on the 360/ps3 versions....but yeah Nintendo ain't having any 3rd party support smh.
  • focus
    focus Members Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2014
    zoomzoomp5 wrote: »
    Without a doubt on FPS. I seen the FPS comparison with Tomb Raider on both consoles. PS4 smashed the XBone.

    Did it? People seem to think hitting 60fps at some point is the same as maintaining 60fps. The PS4's framerate had crazy drops, 20 - 30 fps dips. You didn't see that on the XBOX version cause it was 30fps. I'd rather have a consistent 30fps than the wild drops and up and downs seen on the PS4 version. The same can be said about Call of Duty: Ghost...and apparently, now Thief.
    Playing through Thief on PS4 and Xbox One over the past week I'm not so sure 1080p on consoles is a standard that should be set for next-gen. The PS4 version struggles needlessly to try to maintain a 30 frames per second presentation, regularly dipping into the 15-20 range during gameplay. At several points in the journey, it even edges toward the single digits. That isn't even something I remember dealing with on the PlayStation 3 or Xbox 360.

    The Xbox One version seems to run significantly better
    What makes this particularly controversial is the Xbox One version does a much better job of maintaining a steady framerate. I'd go as far as to say because of this, the Xbox One version is better.

    So how is it that Thief on Xbox One is able to do this? Well, the short answer is 900p. It's displayed at a lower resolution, requiring roughly 660,000 fewer pixels per image to be rendered. However, the visual clarity would make you think the six-digit figure is in no way accurate. The truth is that's due to diminishing returns. Between 900p and 1080p the images don't look nearly as different as going from the standard definition output of 480i up to 720p. Surprisingly, the pixel difference is the same.

    http://www.craveonline.com/gaming/ar...ays-the-answer

  • funkdocdamc
    funkdocdamc Members Posts: 3,786 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Alkinduz wrote: »
    So there is hope for the wii u then....? runs smooth 60f 1080p no probs and they ain't even really put the console to work....Zelda is going to be so sick

    wii u version of mgs should be ? on the 360/ps3 versions....but yeah Nintendo ain't having any 3rd party support smh.

    Yeah, anyone can maintain that with cartoon graphics lol.
  • focus
    focus Members Posts: 5,361 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2014
    Alkinduz wrote: »
    So there is hope for the wii u then....? runs smooth 60f 1080p no probs and they ain't even really put the console to work....Zelda is going to be so sick

    wii u version of mgs should be ? on the 360/ps3 versions....but yeah Nintendo ain't having any 3rd party support smh.

    Yeah, anyone can maintain that with cartoon graphics lol.

    Well, nobody told Knack...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1Dhr17o0YU

    Compared to...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVtDpUa5Jk
  • zoomzoomp5
    zoomzoomp5 Members Posts: 609 ✭✭✭
    I can't figure out how to embed IGN videos (yea yea i know). But this video has a decent side by side comparison of tomb raider for both consoles. I know it's all in the developers to determine how well the game is going to perform on a system IN MOST CASES, but couldn't they just have the ? run as smooth as the ps4? and it dont look like the frames drop on the PS4 when there's all type of ? on the screen, so stop. CLICK THE LINK!

    http://www.ign.com/videos/2014/01/27/tomb-raider-definitive-edition-performance-comparison

    I guess the only thing that video proves is that developers might be subjective on performance of a game because apparently THIEF runs like ? on PS4. With that being said, get MGS on PS4 because we all know Hideo ? with sony lol
  • achewon87
    achewon87 Members Posts: 5,464 ✭✭✭✭✭
    zoomzoomp5 wrote: »
    I can't figure out how to embed IGN videos (yea yea i know). But this video has a decent side by side comparison of tomb raider for both consoles. I know it's all in the developers to determine how well the game is going to perform on a system IN MOST CASES, but couldn't they just have the ? run as smooth as the ps4? and it dont look like the frames drop on the PS4 when there's all type of ? on the screen, so stop. CLICK THE LINK!

    http://www.ign.com/videos/2014/01/27/tomb-raider-definitive-edition-performance-comparison

    I guess the only thing that video proves is that developers might be subjective on performance of a game because apparently THIEF runs like ? on PS4. With that being said, get MGS on PS4 because we all know Hideo ? with sony lol

    You can only embed Youtube or Vimeo...

    For IGN vids find the Youtube version cause no one is clicking links up in here...
  • zoomzoomp5
    zoomzoomp5 Members Posts: 609 ✭✭✭
    focus wrote: »
    Alkinduz wrote: »
    So there is hope for the wii u then....? runs smooth 60f 1080p no probs and they ain't even really put the console to work....Zelda is going to be so sick

    wii u version of mgs should be ? on the 360/ps3 versions....but yeah Nintendo ain't having any 3rd party support smh.

    Yeah, anyone can maintain that with cartoon graphics lol.

    Well, nobody told Knack...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1Dhr17o0YU

    Compared to...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVVtDpUa5Jk




    Knack looked like ? when I tried it out so that ? was an instant pass. Mario doesnt skip a beat and looks amazing on my 70 inch SONY.
  • The Lonious Monk
    The Lonious Monk Members Posts: 26,258 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm inclined to agree that steady frame rate at lower resolution is better too. I don't see how this really reflects on the systems at all though. That's an issue with the developers and their decision maker.